Order

1. Since common question of law and facts are involved in both the petitions, hence, with the consent of counsel appearing for both the parties, arguments have been heard together and these petitions are decided by the following order:-

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 11/2019:-

2. Instant petition has been preferred against the order dated 22.06.2018 passed by the Court of the Additional District Magistrate (East), Jaipur, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ADM’) by which the application containing objections was submitted by the petitioner with regard to wrong marking of the exhibits pertaining to a Patta i.e., Ex. 2 has been rejected.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that proceedings under Sections 145, 146 & 147 Cr.P.C. are pending between the parties before the Court of the ADM. During the course of evidence twelve documents were submitted by the respondents on the record which included a Patta which was cancelled by the competent authority wayback & in spite of above the Patta was ordered to be taken on record by exhibiting the same. Counsel submitted that once the said Patta has been cancelled, then the same cannot be allowed to be taken on record and be marked as exhibit. He submits that an objection in this regard was taken on the very same day but the learned Magistrate has rejected the application submitted by the petitioner on a ground that the objection was taken after a delay of more than two and a half months. This fact is contrary to the record, rather the application was submitted on the very same day along with the documents to be taken on record. Hence, interference of this Court is warranted.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent oppose the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the Patta in question was validly issued by the competent authority and copy of the same was produced on the record. The genuineness of the Patta cannot be doubted or disputed, hence, the Court below has not committed any error in taking the same on record. He further submits that in the meantime, the proceedings of the aforesaid case proceeded and a detailed cross-examination has already been done by the petitioner on the Patta as well as other documents and thereafter the case was posted for final arguments. Hence, under these circumstances, at this stage, such objection taken by the petitioner is not sustainable in the eyes of law and the instant petition is liable to be rejected.

5. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record.

6. Perusal of the record indicates that both the parties are facing the proceedings initiated under Sections 145, 146 & 147 Cr.P.C. and during pendency of the same the respondents placed certain documents i.e., Ex. 1 to 12 on the record. It appears that an objection was taken by the petitioner to not to take the Patta i.e., Ex. 2 on the record on the pretext that the same was cancelled wayback, however, the aforesaid objection by the petitioner was turned down by the Court of the ADM by passing the order impugned and thereafter the case has proceeded and the statements of the respondents were recorded, & when the cross-examination was done questions were raised about the said Patta.

7. Whether the Patta in question i.e., Ex. 2 is genuine or not, whether the same has been cancelled or not, this fact can be appreciated by the Court of the ADM at the time of passing the final judgment. Once the documents have been allowed to be taken on record and a detailed cross-examination has been done with regard to the said document, the genuineness of the same can be examined by the Court of the ADM at the time of final arguments. Hence, this Court finds no error in the order passed by the Court below and the petition is liable to be and is hereby rejected.

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 271/2025:-

8. The instant petition has been p